The current view of marketing focuses on the exchange relationships used by both profit and nonprofit organizations. The research reported here examined a particular nonprofit marketing situation—states attracting direct foreign investment. The marketing strategy used by the top ten states in 1984 depends upon a reciprocal, dynamic process involving a strong internal network and emphasizing two-way communication with prospective investors, thereby supporting the claim that the external environment should have an important role in the marketing process. The results of this investigation also hare public policy implications for the ways in which a state agency can attract direct foreign investment.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AjamiRiad A. and RicksDavid A. (1981). “Motives of Non-American Firms Investing in the U.S.,”Journal of International Business Studies, (Winter), Vol. 12, No. 3, p. 25–34.
2.
DayGeorge A. and WensleyRobin (1983), “Marketing Theory with a Strategic Orientation,”Journal of Marketing, 47 (Fall), 79–89.
Economic Indicators (1987), 100th Congress, 1st Session, U.S. Government Printing Office (July).
5.
Foreign Direct Investment in the United States: 1984 Transactions (1985), U.S. Department of Commerce International Trade Division (September).
6.
GordonSara L. and LeesFrancis A. (1981), “Locating Foreign Plants in the U.S.: The Volkswagon Experience,”Industrial Development, (November/December), 24–27.
7.
GreerThomas V. and GreerJoanne G. (1987), “National Image: The Concept and Its Measurement,”Emerging International Strategic Frontiers, Proceedings of the American Marketing Association International Marketing Conference, American Marketing Association, 16–20.
8.
The Handbook of Basic Economic Statistics (1987), Economics Statistics Bureau of Washington, D.C., Vol. 41, No. 7 (July).
9.
HamiltonCharles A. (1967), “Opportunities for International Market Development,” in RyansJohn K.Jr., and BakerJames C. (eds.), World Marketing: A Multinational Approach.New York: John Wiley and Sons, 3–14.
10.
IrvinRobert W. (1980), “States Woo Nissan as Firm Hunts U.S. Plant Site,”Automotive News, (June 9), 1.
11.
“Japanese Automakers Site Plants in U.S.” (1980), Industrial Development, (November/December), 23–4.
12.
JohnsonRichard (1984), “How Michigan Won Mazda Plant,”Automotive News, 13.
“Kyocera Unit Plans $30 Million Factory in Vancouver, Washington” (1984), The Wall Street Journal, (August 7), 45.
15.
McCarthyJ. and PerreaultW. E. (1987), Marketing, 8th edition, Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Irwin.
16.
MentzerJohn T. and SchwartzDavid J. (1985), Marketing Today.San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
17.
RyansJohn K. Jr., and ShanklinWilliam L. (1986), Guide to Marketing for Economic Development.Columbus, Ohio: Publishing Horizons, Inc.
18.
SchusterCamille P., SamliA. Coskun, and BodkinCharles (1987), “Marketing a Region in the International Arena,”Emerging International Strategic Frontiers, Proceedings of the American Marketing Association International Marketing Conference, American Marketing Association, 268–72.
19.
ShostackG. Lynn (1987), “Service Positioning Through Structural Change,”Journal of Marketing, 51 (January), 34–43.
20.
Simon-MillerFrancoise (1986), “National Marketing—The Art of Building Stronger Trade,”Presentation at American Marketing Association's International Marketing Conference in Singapore (June 16–18).
21.
TesarGeorge (1987), “West European Direct Investment in the U.S.,”International Marketing Review (Spring), 52–60.
22.
“What Toyota Checks in Hunt for Plant Site” (1935), Automotive News, (August 26), 2.
23.
ZeithamlCarl P. and ZeithamlValarie A. (1984), “Environmental Management: Revising the Marketing Perspective,”Journal of Marketing, 48 (Spring), 46–53.
